The criminal justice system can be daunting, but you don’t need to go through it alone. Our Criminal lawyers are here to guide you every step of the way.
Contact Our Firm
Directed verdict of not guilty granted after three day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket on charges of Sexual Assault, Sexual Exploitation, and Sexual Interference x 2. The client had been married to his wife, Y.W, for over 9 years and there was a daughter, who was the complainant in this case. In August of 2018 the complainant came forward with allegations that in 2015 Y.Z. had touched her breast and then for the balance of 2015 and 2016 had committed various acts of touching in her bedroom. These allegations came forward right at the time that Y.Z. and his wife were having extensive arguments about his son from a previous marriage coming to Canada to live with them. These arguments were so disruptive that the Y.Z and his wife longer shared a bedroom and agreed to separate in August of 2018. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was retained. Joseph Neuberger carefully reviewed the statements, and obtained from the client a detailed history and chronology of all events from their marriage up his date of charge. In addition, defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained the family court documents, and messages between Y.Z. and his wife. While the case was ongoing, new disclosure was provided of a partial recording made by the wife in August of 2018 where she questioned him about the alleged sexual assault. The recording was less than one minute and cut off at the end. At trial, Joseph Neuberger extensively cross-examined the complainant about the allegations and established inconsistencies and implausible facts. However, Joseph Neuberger had court break early and so the mother, Mr. Y.Z. would testify the next day. Defence Lawyer Joseph Neuberger suspected that the complainant and her mother would speak over night prior to the mother/wife testifying. The next day the mother testified and Joseph Neuberger vigorously cross-examined her, showing first that it was obvious that the complainant and her mother had spoken about the cross-examination thus showing collusion, and second, the recording was obviously cut off. Joseph Neuberger cross-examined on the recording and the complainant insisted it was a confession by Y.Z. and that he had not denied the allegations. However, under cross-examination she admitted that what she had turned over to the police was only a small part of a nine (9) minute recording. Thus, court was adjourned as a police officer attended at the mother’s residence and retrieved a copy of the full and complete recording. After careful review with the Crown, it was apparent that the mother, Y.W., had lied to the court and the police about the nature of the recording and in fact a full transcript of the recording showed that Y.Z. had indeed denied the allegations and the mother only gave what portion she wanted to provide to the police to try and convince them that he had admitted the offence. Thus, the Crown assessed the case and based on the evidence arising from cross-examination invited the Court to enter not guilty verdicts on all charges.
Charge of Assault withdraw prior to trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket. J.S. was charged after an argument with an owner of a competing restaurant in a mall. J.S. was alleged to have struck the complainant several times. Joseph Neuberger was retained as his criminal defence lawyer. There was no video surveillance from the mall and the disclosure on the case was very slim. There were no injuries to the complainant. Joseph Neuberger hired a private investigator to take some statements from employees of other restaurants who may have witnessed the incident. The statements disclosed that in fact the complainant instigated the event. These statements were turned over to the Crown. After several discussions, it was agreed that the charge would be withdrawn and J.S. would sign a common law peace bond. As such, the charge of Assault was formally withdrawn.
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn after negotiations with the Crown. The client was charged with having assaulted her boyfriend during a heated argument about their relationship. The boyfriend did sustain injuries. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was retained. He sent the client to therapy with an expert in domestic violence and asked the client to complete community service. A report was provided to the Crown along with the letter of community service. After two pre-trials with the Crown, an agreement was reached to withdraw the charge and the client would sign a common law peace bond. Accordingly, the charge of Domestic Assault was withdrawn.
Client acquitted after an eight day jury trial in Toronto, Superior Court, of charges of Domestic Assault, Assault with a Weapon, Weapons Dangerous, Use Imitation Firearm, Assault Causing Bodily Harm. The client was in a one year relationship and in November of 2016 he moved in with his girlfriend, one of the complainants. K.W. left for China in December to visit family and while away complainant number one sent text messages breaking up with him and telling him that she has packed all of his belongings and place them in his car. This happened to have included a bb gun. When K.W. arrived home he had discovered that she had removed $6,000.00 from his account. K.W. went to confront his girlfriend and she did not want to speak. He left but then returned about half an hour later after she contacted him about their cat. He returned and was confronted by her new boyfriend. A fight broke out and police were eventually called and the client was charged with several offences. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the defence lawyer. K.W. was initially charged with use firearm, however, defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger hired an expert, and established that the projectile speed was less than that found by the police expert and the charge was down graded to imitation firearm. Further, a defence investigator was hired to take additional statements. Joseph Neuberger set the matter down for a preliminary hearing and cross-examined the two complainants in a manner toward developing the defence. It was very help and then in preparation for trial spend considerable time preparing the client to testify and drafting the cross-examinations of all of the Crown witnesses. After two days of deliberations, the jury found K.W. not guilty on all charges, including Domestic Assault, Assault with Weapon, Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Use Imitation Firearm and Weapons Dangerous.
Charges of Domestic Assault x 2 and Mischief Under withdrawn prior to setting a trial date in the Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto. A.S. was ending a relationship with his girlfriend. The two had been living together for a short period of time. The complainant still maintained her own apartment. An argument erupted over why the relationship was ending and when A.S. requested the complainant to leave his apartment, she refused and a pushing match commenced. The complainant called police and A.S. was charged with two counts of Assault and Mischief to her cell phone. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the criminal lawyer to defend A.S. When Joseph Neuberger reviewed the disclosure including the statement of the complainant and police officer notes, there was inconsistency between the description of the two assaults and the complete lack of any injury and damage to clothing. The cell phone was intact as well. Several pre-trials were held and A.S. agreed to take a course of counselling directed at conflict resolution and after successful completion of the course, the charges were withdrawn and A.S. signed a common law peace bond.
Charge of Sexual Assault withdrawn on eve of second set of motions for records of the complainant’s psychiatric records. M.C. met the complainant on the dating site Plenty of Fish. The two engaged in highly suggestive messaging and then arranged to meet for an intimate encounter. M.C. attended the complainant’s residence and engaged in relations. After, the complainant became angry at M.C. and then later called police and he was charged with sexual assault. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the defence lawyer. Joseph Neuberger spent considerable time with the disclosure, and the client reviewing the events. In addition, he obtained the text messages between the parties, that were extremely helpful for cross-examination. However, just prior to the first trial date, the complainant made several posts on social media that raised significant issues regarding her mental at the time of the alleged offence. A private investigator was hired to do a complete social media investigation with a tech expert and as a result the defence brought a third party records motion for her psychiatric records. The motion was adjourned as was the original trial date. A second Application was filed for the records and just prior to the hearing of the applications the charge was withdrawn. Some of the mental health issues were relevant as they related to perception but also to issues of manipulation by the complainant. As a result the complainant did not want to participate in the trial anymore and the Crown withdrew the charges.
Charge of Assault withdrawn prior to setting trial dates in Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket. A verbal argument escalated into a physical altercation at traffic court. The altercation was observed by police officers at a traffic courthouse and Y.X. was arrested for domestic assault on the spot. Mariya Protsenko of Neuberger & Partners was retained as his criminal defence lawyer to represent Y.X. on the charge. Mariya reviewed disclosure diligently and uncovered a number of issues with the evidence against the client including potential violation of constitutional right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The client was not provided a Mandarin interpret at the police station and could not fully appreciate the rights being explained to her. After an extensive pre-trial with the Crown Attorney, Ms. Protsenko convinced the Crown that only one hour of counseling was required before the charge was to be withdrawn. After a completion of brief counseling, the charge was formally withdrawn.
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn after several pre-trials with the prosecutor in the Ontario Court of Justice, Scarborough. The complainant, L.G.’s wife, was upset with L.G. for smoking inside the house. They had an argument and L.G allegedly pushed the complainant to the floor. The complainant tried to get up, however, L.G. kept pushing her so that she would stay down. The complainant also indicated to the prosecutor assigned to this matter that she was tortured and tormented by L.G. throughout many years and that she wanted to proceed to a trial. Mariya Protsenko of Neuberger & Partners was retained by the client on this matter. Mariya conducted a number of pre-trials with the persecutor including face to face meetings and conversations at the courthouse. The prosecutor agreed to withdraw the charge against L.G upon him entering into a common law peace bond. No volunteer work or counseling was required. L.G. attended Scarborough courthouse with Mariya and upon entering into a common law peace bond, his charge was
Charges of Assault and Criminal Harassment withdrawn prior to setting trial date in the Ontario Court of Justice, Newmarket. C.J. and A.J.C. were driving together and there was a road incident with another car that then followed them to a mall parking lot. Once out of the cars an argument ensued and a physical altercation. Part of the altercation was captured by video surveillance from local stores. Joseph Neuberger and John Navarrete were retained as the defence lawyers. After a careful review of the surveillance, there were some frames that were enhanced by the defence which appeared to show the complainant making gestures prior to the physical altercation that could be viewed as assaultive and there could be an argument for self-defence on top of the fact that the complainant had followed C.J, and A.J.C. to the parking lot. After two judicial pre-trials, an agreement was reached for all parties to take some anger management counseling related to road rage and at the end of the therapy it was agreed all charges would be withdrawn. Once the therapy was completed the charges were formally withdrawn.
Charges of Domestic Assault and Mischief Under withdrawn after extensive pre-trial discussions with the Crown. The complainant and M.Y. were in the midst of a separation. An argument erupted over an issue about support. The complainant called police and alleged that M.Y. had pushed her and grabbed her. M.Y. was arrested, and ordered to have no contact and not return to the home. Joseph Neuberger was retained as the defence lawyer. During the course of the criminal proceeding, the complainant wrote to the Crown that she wished to reconcile and have marriage counselling. This was communicated to Joseph Neuberger. Joseph Neuberger spoke with his client and he was in favour of marriage counselling and reconciliation. Joseph Neuberger had several pre-trials with the Crown Attorney and worked out a therapy program for M.Y. that would then turn into marriage counselling. The Crown agreed to withdraw the charge after M.Y. completed 12 sessions successfully. This was done, and the charges were withdrawn.
Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results and that the amount recovered and other litigation outcomes will vary according to the facts in individual cases.
